|
EconStor >
Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung (ZEW), Mannheim >
ZEW Discussion Papers >
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/10419/24615
|
| | |
Full metadata record
| DC Field | | Value | | Language |
| dc.contributor.author | | Muehler, Grit | | en_US |
| dc.contributor.author | | Beckmann, Michael | | en_US |
| dc.contributor.author | | Schauenberg, Bernd | | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | | 2009-02-16T14:58:03Z | | - |
| dc.date.available | | 2009-02-16T14:58:03Z | | - |
| dc.date.issued | | 2007 | | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | | http://hdl.handle.net/10419/24615 | | - |
| dc.description.abstract | | The present paper examines the wage effects of continuous training programs using individual-level data from the German Socio Economic Panel (GSOEP). In order to account for selectivity in training participation we estimate average treatment effects (ATE and ATT) of general and firm-specific continuous training programs using several state-of-the-art propensity score matching (PSM) estimators. Additionally, we also apply a combined matching difference-indifferences (MDiD) estimator to account for unobserved individual characteristics (e.g. motivation, ability). While the estimated ATE and ATT for general training are significant ranging between about 4 and 7.5 %, the corresponding wage effects of firm-specific training are mostly insignificant. Using the more appropriate MDiD estimator, however, we find a more precise and highly significant wage effect of about 5 to 6 %, though only for general training and not for firm-specific training. These results are consistent with standard human capital theory insofar as general training is associated with larger wage increases than firm-specific training. Furthermore, we conclude that firms may intend to use specific training to adjust to new job requirements, while career-relevant changes may be conditioned to general training. | | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | | eng | | en_US |
| dc.publisher | | Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung (ZEW) Mannheim | | en_US |
| dc.relation.ispartofseries | | ZEW Discussion Papers 07-048 | | en_US |
| dc.subject.jel | | M53 | | en_US |
| dc.subject.jel | | C21 | | en_US |
| dc.subject.jel | | J31 | | en_US |
| dc.subject.jel | | J24 | | en_US |
| dc.subject.ddc | | 330 | | en_US |
| dc.subject.keyword | | Continuous training | | en_US |
| dc.subject.keyword | | wage effect | | en_US |
| dc.subject.keyword | | average treatment effect | | en_US |
| dc.subject.keyword | | selectivity bias | | en_US |
| dc.subject.keyword | | propensity score matching estimators | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Weiterbildung | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Bildungsertrag | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Arbeitsmarktpolitik | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Schätztheorie | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Schätzung | | en_US |
| dc.subject.stw | | Deutschland | | en_US |
| dc.title | | The Returns to Continuous Training in Germany: New Evidence from Propensity Score Matching Estimators | | en_US |
| dc.type | | Working Paper | | en_US |
| dc.identifier.ppn | | 539954322 | | en_US |
| dc.rights | | http://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungen | | - |
| dc.identifier.repec | | RePEc:zbw:zewdip:5874 | | - |
| Appears in Collections: | | Publikationen von Forscherinnen und Forschern des ZEW ZEW Discussion Papers
|
Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
|